Summary Record of the Third Meeting of the Ad Hoc Expert Group on “Cost of Nuclear Accidents, Liability Issues and their Impact on Electricity Costs” [NEA/NDC(2014)12]

Extended mandate at the 64th meeting of the Committee for Technical and Economic Studies on Nuclear Energy Development and the Fuel Cycle (NDC) [NEA/NDC(2015)6/FINAL]

Extended mandate at the 66th meeting of the Committee for Technical and Economic Studies on Nuclear Energy Development and the Fuel Cycle (NDC) [NEA/NDC/M(2016)2/FINAL]

Extension of the Mandate of the Ad Hoc Expert Group on the Estimation of Potential Losses Due to Nuclear Accidents, Liability Issues and Their Impact on Electricity [NEA/NDC(2017)29]

Extended mandate at the 70th meeting of the Committee for Technical and Economic Studies on Nuclear Energy Development and the Fuel Cycle (NDC) [NEA/NDC/M(2018)2]

Mandate of the Expert Group on the Estimation of Potential Losses Due to Nuclear Accidents, Liability Issues and their Impact on Electricity Costs (COSTNA) [NEA/NDC(2018)18]

Mandate (Document extract):

Extract of document [NEA/NDC(2018)18]

BACKGROUND

Albeit remote, the risk of a severe nuclear accident cannot be reduced to zero, carrying the potential to cause grave consequences to the concerned nuclear site and, if offsite radiological releases are involved, the surrounding territory, with effects on the surrounding population and potential contamination of associated land. As experienced in the Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi accidents, direct and indirect costs can reach several per cents of the GDP and seriously affect the equilibrium of a country for some years. Direct and indirect consequences of the accident can also extend to other countries. That was the case during the Chernobyl accident, when many European countries experienced land contamination, with consequent restrictions on food consumption implemented across Europe. Another far-reaching effect caused to various degrees by the three severe accidents (Three Miles Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi) has been the impact on energy choices of several countries and on the whole nuclear industry. ‘What are the “true” costs of a nuclear accident’ is therefore a complex and highly debated question.

OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE

As underlined in the previous NEA study, “Methodologies for Assessing the Economic Consequences of Nuclear Reactor Accidents”, the methodologies adopted, along with the cost elements these can consider and combine, greatly depend upon the objective of the cost study and the intended use of the resulting “accident cost” figures. For instance, only some cost elements will be considered from the perspective of accident management, while a proper assessment of external costs of nuclear accident would require a broader perspective, thus including a larger range of cost elements.

The main objectives of the study are as follows:

Conduct an appraisal of existing studies and data on the economic costs of severe nuclear accidents that have occurred in civil nuclear energy (Three Miles Island, Chernobyl, Fukushima).

Develop methodological advice on cost assessments, including consistent definition of damage and cost elements and their perspective-specific characterisation and relative order of importance.

To the extent possible develop case studies on the basis of the defined methodology and perform reviews, e.g. to assess the impact of approaches and limits adopted by regulatory authorities and governments on accident consequences/costs.

On the basis of expert advice consider how the risks associated with such accidents might be analysed and compared with other risks.